Oh, my point wasn't that Apple was there first (sorry for the confusion) - sure there have been 64-bit systems for a long time. My point is, Apple went ahead and made a mass-market system built around a 64-bit architecture. It would seem that it was only then that Intel/AMD came out with consumer 64-bit desktop processors (or at least it wasn't until after this that they became in any way popular).
So it ended up that Apple had designed an entire OS version around 64-bit capability, and Windows had to follow suit, but didn't invest enough time in it.
The fact that so few people use 64-bit PC systems does indicate that MS accurately predicted that it wasn't a major issue - and it isn't.
Working for the campus IT department last fall when students were coming to Syracuse, I believe out of the 8,000 computers we registered on the campus network, 1 or 2 were 64-bit PCs...
I just think it is pointless to build a 64-bit PC, as the benefits don't seem to outweigh the issues I've helped people with, between software and hardware incompatibility.
I certainly don't want to start another debate between PC and Mac... this is more a complaint about people jumping on bandwagons, etc etc
And thus ends my early-morning rant
